flynnfandomcom-20200213-history
Derren Brown method (psychology)
The Derren Brown method, (a phrase that originates where Derren Brown takes on 9 chess masters and beats half of them despite not knowing chess), is a technique for engaging a superiorly knowledgeable foe or even several of them even when you have little knowledge of the subject you're engaging them on. Description In strategic games, in terms of knowledge, there may be a point where, as an individual, you are outmatched and outclassed by one or more of your opponents. In most instances, individuals may admit defeat and give up, or avail themselves regardless of a plan or outcome. However, the Derren Brown method is a technique that allows for a reasonable chance of victory against a much smarter or more knowledgeable opponent in most instances. The Derren Brown method may be seen as clever, or cheating, depending of people's views on it. In effect, you play two or more people off of each other, but unlike in a similar technique such as a man-in-the-middle attack where the source origin of a strategy, technique, peice of knowledge or argument is purposefully made known, in a Derren Brown method, the source origin is purposefully kept quiet to make it seem like you are the responsible party (a type of pufferfish effect in that you look smarter, stronger, or more capable). In the case of Derren Brown in his chess game against 9 chess masters, he merely plays 4 chess masters off of 4 other chess masters (purposefully matching very strong ones to very weak ones) by memorising their moves as he goes around and then mirroring them to each other, and plays the last game as himself (most likely learning some of the techniques used and using them as part of an adaptive argument attack against the last chess player). As a result Derren Brown seems like a much more capable chess player than he actually is, having defeated 4 chess masters 'single' handedly. Techniques When engaging an individual, several individuals or a particular event or situation, you must figure out a weak-point or counteraction to those individuals or events in order to start a 'Derren Brown' method, and you must work quickly in order to achieve the illusion it's naturally occurring. You might play one person off of another within the group that's attacking you (using the opening move, attack or information to engage or counter-attack another target in the group). Rephrasing of words with the use of a thesaurus can help obscure it's point of origin. If you anticipated this battle or argument, performing an adaptive argument attack before it occurs is basically this. When engaging individuals using this method means you're off-tempo with a negative-tempo basis, meaning you are at a disadvantage when using this technique (although it means you stand some chance of at least beating some of them, compared to little or no chance at all). Sourcing the counter-information quickly to make it seem spur-of-the-moment is known as 3-minute wiki-walk, and is akin to the Derren Brown method and the man-in-the-middle attack, but it deals with static (EG webpages) rather than dynamic information sources (EG people). Outright cheating (scripted answers to questions) is not the Derren Brown method: the Derren Brown method requires point-to-point transfer between two capable sources so they can process it (for example, you would have to input the moves of the person into a chess AI, and reply with the chess AI's responses to the person) and relies on a form of memorisation. IE, the information and responses are constructed in real-time in response to a new or unusual event. Examples If you were up against a chemistry expert, your port of call would be to start a dialogue with another chemistry expert of an opposing opinion (so any challenges the attacking chemistry expert you make to the other opposing expert). If you were engaged in an online chess match (which may seem like cheating), you might source a chess AI to win the battle for you, or a much more experienced chess player of which to do the secondary chess corresponence with. Relevant Pufferfish effect (psychology). Adaptive argument attack (logic). Man in the middle attack (psychology). 3-minute wiki-walk (logic).